> Mark Tinka > Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 12:55 PM > > On 5/Apr/20 12:25, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: > > > Nowadays however, in times of FRR (-well that one has u-loops), but > > for instance ti-LFA or classical RSVP-TE Bypass... and BGP PIC "Core", > > I'd say the SPF calculation time is becoming less and less relevant. > > So in current designs I'm tuning IGPs for egress edge-node protection > > only, i.e. for generating LSP/LSA ASAP and then propagating it to all > > other ingress edge-nodes as fast as possible so that BGP PIC "Core" > > can react to the missing loopback and switch to an alternate egress > > edge-node.(reactions to core-node failures or link-failures are IGP > > agnostic and driven solely by loss of light or BFD/LFM...). > > *Even in the egress edge-node protection case there are now RSVP-TE > > and SR-TE features addressing this. > > > > So I guess only the mem and cpu load and ultimately stability of the > > RPD (or IGP process) is the remaining concern in extreme load cases (not > the > > convergence though). > > For me, I'd say small FIB's in a network that runs MPLS all the way into the > Access (where the small FIB's reside) is the biggest risk to scaling out the IGP. > On those boxes, CPU and memory aren't the issue (and they are nowhere > near as powerful as the chassis' in the data centre), it's the FIB slots. > Right, but there are bunch of techniques to address the FIB scaling problem of MPLS all the way to access layer (cell tower) deployments.
adam _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp